Standard insurance theory predicts that households that anticipate high insurance costs are those that are willing to purchase health insurance (adverse selection). However, there are also several other reasons why households may choose to purchase health insurance. Since insurance is a consumption-smoothing tool, risk-averse households may be more willing to purchase insurance. Households that can self-insure may be less likely to purchase insurance. Newer theories have hypothesized that budget constraints, present bias, or having little understanding of insurance may decrease the likelihood of buying insurance even for sick households. Age or gender bias may play into the decision, as may trust of Western medicine. These and other less-traditional type of selection factors may be particularly relevant in developing countries. This paper presents evidence collected during the expansion of the SKY Health Microinsurance program in rural Cambodia. Health insurance is a newer product in developing countries, and this type of evidence has rarely been explored. A companion paper explores the extent of adverse selection into this program (Polimeni and Levine, 2011), while this paper studies other influences on take-up. Contrary to informational models, we find no evidence that risk-averse households are more likely to purchase SKY, and instead find evidence of the opposite. Budget constraints, quality of health facilities, and age and gender of ill household members are all found to influence the decision to purchase insurance.
pdf : 534.1 KB
534.1 KB (pdf)
downloaded 1978 times
on the same regionInstitutional documentpublished in December 2019Institutional documentpublished in December 2019Expositionpublished in November 2019Institutional documentpublished in November 2019Expositionpublished in June 2019Institutional documentpublished in May 2019
on the same topicVidéopublished in November 2019Research documentThe economic trigger: Enabling gendered social inclusion processes and outcomes amidst poverty escapes in Niger and Malawipublished in October 2019Vidéopublished in October 2019Vidéopublished in September 2019Research documentpublished in July 2019Research documentpublished in February 2019
from the same collectionEvaluation documentEvaluation of the Second Objective of the Biodiversity Cross-cutting Intervention Framework (2013–2017)published in May 2019Evaluation documentEvaluation of the AFD “Protected Area” conservation and development intervention contributions (2000-2017). Synthesis of the final reportpublished in March 2019Evaluation documentpublished in February 2019Evaluation documentpublished in April 2018Evaluation documentpublished in February 2018Evaluation documentpublished in April 2017